My Christmas wish: Bill Clinton's 3rd term

(J. Scott Applewhite, Associated…)

December 15, 2010|By Jack A. Chambless | Guest columnist

It was one of those positively surreal moments where, for a nanosecond, you thought it was the 1990s again.

Yes, those 1990s with the sub-4 percent unemployment rates, modest inflation, tremendous economic growth and even federal budget surpluses. Yet, there he was in a presidential press conference — good ol' Bill Clinton standing in for Barack Obama.

To quote our current president, "Let me be clear on this point..." I never voted for Bill Clinton — even when my father chided me over the fact that Clinton and my grandfather both come from Hope, Ark.

As a proud Reagan Libertarian, I could not, in good conscience, vote for someone who wanted to nationalize health care and who once passed the largest tax increase in our nation's history.

Yet, as I watched Clinton pinch-hit for Obama Friday night in defense of tax cuts and economic growth and a return to prosperity, I realized a humbling truth. That is, when taking into account his two terms in office, William Jefferson Clinton was one of the best economic presidents of the 20th — or any — century.

Let's add up his accomplishments:

From 1994 until he left office, he presided over numerous tax reforms that made the country richer from top to bottom. He cut the capital-gains tax from 28 percent to 20 percent. Not only did investment in new capital increase, but the subsequent economic growth it created led to more tax revenue, not less, for politicians to spend.

He lowered the tax on the sale of our homes to zero percent, as long as we live in them for at least two years. He ushered in the Roth IRA that allowed millions of Americans to save for retirement and avoid the false hope that Social Security would be all we would need.

On the issue of trade, he got NAFTA ratified, lifted the embargo against Vietnam and successfully traveled the world, encouraging foreign leaders to allow American money to flow into their lands in search of businesses, infrastructure and other investments. The result was expanded world trade, increased wealth in America and our trading partners, and downward pressure on consumer prices stemming from more international competition.

Then there is government spending. Yes, it is clear that government spending increased during his eight years in office. The key fact that my conservative friends do not want to acknowledge is that under his watch, government expenditures increased at a slower rate than under George H.W. Bush or George W. Bush. Under President Clinton, we even got major welfare reform that lowered the dependence of millions of Americans on their fellow man. The real era of fiscal conservatism — relatively speaking — was when Clinton held the checkbook.

It would be irresponsible of me as an economist to neglect to mention that Newt Gingrich and the Reagan Republicans who took over Congress in 1994 were instrumental in forcing Clinton to go along with more pro-growth tax and spending initiatives. It would also be worth noting that Clinton was reluctant to go along with many of the laws he eventually passed.

However, as British author Aldous Huxley wrote, "Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." The facts are clear: The last prosperous, pro-business, pro-growth decade America had came under the active policies of a Democrat, and our country is now broke largely under the watch of Republicans.

I hope that either Barack Obama continues to act like Bill Clinton or that Congress will amend the Constitution so that Clinton can run again in 2012.

Jack A. Chambless is an economics professor at Valencia Community College.